Lasprogata v. Qualls

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that plaintiff’s separate resolution of lawsuits against the original tortfeasor and health care providers, and abstention from suing one for the harm caused by the other, resolved legal tension
• all of which hold that an original wrongdoer and a physician who aggravates the existing injury or causes new injury are not joint tortfeasors
• court considered difference in time between each defendant’s negligent act and differences between duties that each defendant owed to plaintiff to determine that causes were apportionable
• court considered difference in time between each defendant's negligent act and differences between duties that each defendant owed to plaintiff to determine that causes were apportionable
• “Case law specifically holds that a tortfeasor originally causing an injury and a physician who subsequently aggravates or causes a new injury are Not [sic] joint tortfeasors.”
• the original tortfeasor and subsequent negligent doctor did not “jointly” cause the injury because their injuries were separate in time. Therefore, the damages should be apportioned accordingly

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).